christmas is over and most people have the day off, but the politicians are still pretending to work. it's wednesday, december 26th, and this is "now." i'm ari melber in for alex wagner, and joining me today, jonathan chait, joy reid, new york times political reporter nicolas and catherine crier. christmas break is already over for president obama. he's flying back to washington tonight and aides say he's ready for a deal. it's not clear whether this trip is a sign of compromises to come or another display of theater showing the president is willing to work even as his opponents

skip town. meanwhile, though, americans are growing skeptical. in the last week alone, gallup found a 15-point drop in the number of americans who think congress will negotiate a deal on the fiscal cliff. that's not all, holiday spending also hit its lowest rate since the 2008 recession, which retailers are blaming on the uncertainty in washington. so where do we go from here? well, since the house failed to get a vote on the tax package last week, all eyes are on the senate. a temporary deal that would basically extend all the tax cuts for those making under a quarter million. the deal would also rescue long-term unemployment benefits and instead of addressing those automatic spending cuts we've all heard about that are set for january 1st, this temporary deal would delay them for another six months. few are optimistic this new plan, if we do go over the clifr, would work out. so what would half if we go over the cliff? the payroll tax holiday will expire on new year's day.

that means most people will start paying more taxes in each paycheck. another 21 million americans would lose federal emergency unemployment benefits and those, let's remember, are people struggling the most right now. across the entire economy going over the cliff could slow the current growth rate of 3.1% and risk sparking another recession. joining us now to break it down from washington is cnbc's john harwood. thanks for being here. >> hey, ari. >> remind us where we were before plan b, how far apart were the last comprehensive offers between the president and negotiators? >> a few hundred billion dollars, which is a lot of money, sounds like a lot of money, but in the context of a ten-year budget deal when you have some very large programs that can be tweaked one way or another, is not that much. they were within shouting distance if the speaker could bring his caucus along to

support the deal that he was promoting and getting close to striking with the president, but it's clear from the failure of plan b he could not bring them along for that deal, and the real question now, ari, is whether or not the speaker is going to be willing to take to the house floor something that could pass with a preponderance of democratic votes and significant chunk of republicans. i think in the end whatever is done, whether it happens before january 1st or after january 1st, that will be required to get it done, but we're not there yet. >> when you say get it done, you mean short of the majority of the republican caucus then? >> yes, this whole majority of the majority formula, which republicans have followed since denny haster was speaker, is not very well suited to this particular circumstance, and it's not well suited to democratic governance when you have divided government and have a chunk of the republican caucus which simply will not align the power that they have with the

policy goals that they have. and it's a matter of when they figure that out and when the leadership decides to act upon that knowledge, but we haven't gotten there. >> right, well, when they figure it out is a key question, because days can turn into years in washington. i want to pick up on something you were pointing out the night of the plan b non-vote where you likened the troubles republicans are having now to other pieces in history. you wrote the political parties with losing hands don't change until they've absorbed lots of punishment, see dems 1968 to 1988, a long stretch, gop not done yet. i thought that was such an interesting point you made that night, because for a lot of people watching, it is hard to understand why a combination of tax cuts for most of the country and spending cuts and according to the last offer a type of social security benefit cut is not good enough for a republican party that just got walloped in the election. can you expound on your theory

there? >> first, let me just talk about democrats. you're too young to remember this, ari, but there was a period of time when people were wondering -- >> i dyed my hair, john. >> people were wondering when democrats could ever win a presidential election again, that's because they were on the wrong side of main street america, on some cultural change happening in the country. they were on the wrong side of issues like the death penalty, on issues like the use of force in foreign affairs, and it wasn't until they'd gotten whacked, george mcgovern lost overwhelmingly, mike ducacas was beaten pretty soundly. after all those things happened, the democratic party through bill clinton and others like him trying to change it, made the party more acceptable to the american people. republicans have not gotten there yet. it was a party as we saw in the election, a declining -- white share of the vote is the declining share of the

electorate. their share is going up, but not enough to compensate. >> right. >> right now the sort of primal scream you hear for spending cuts isn't consummate with the american people. president obama just ran on a program of resisting some of the fundamental ways in which the republicans wanted to change medicare and raise taxes on people over $250,000. he won the election and people from the very red districts elected in the house simply have not adapted to that reality. >> let me go to jonathan chait and the primal scream and the election president obama won, but you wouldn't know this in washington. doesn't it feel sometimes like one side experienced maybe a different election? >> they did. for the house republicans, they don't have to worry about public opinion. the house republicans got fewer votes than house democrats, but the house republicans won anyway because the districts are drawn in such a way the vast majority of republicans are insulated

from public opinion. this conversation we're having of what do the republicans have to do to win back middle america, that's not relevant to them. the only thing they have to worry about is a tea party challenger. that's the only way these guys are going to lose. that's point number one. point number two, no evidence the republican party really wants to cut the main entitlement programs like social security and medicare. the ryan -- >> wait, that's an important point. despite having talked a lot about it and it being the core of the famous ryan plan, you're saying what? >> all the domestic cuts over the first ten years came out of programs for the poor. they just whacked the heck out of programs for the poor. food stamps, children's health care, medicaid, and obama said, no, if we're going to cut spending, we're going to protect the most vul nebl. protecting the most vulnerable takes it away and all that's left is cutting taxes. if the goal is to reduce the

deficit, their goal of cutting taxes is not relevant to that goal so there's no overlap of potential agreement here. that's why there's no deal. >> let's take a listen to a very conservative retiring senator said, soon to be former senator joe lieberman, who is respected and seen as a deal maker. what we need right now is a deal. let's take a listen to something he just said. >> if we allow that to happen, it will be the most colossal, consequential act of congressional irresponsibility in a long time, maybe ever in american history. >> joy, i think what he's saying there and going over the cliff is not that this would be the worst thing congress has done on an objective scale, but the notion of doing something so bad for no reason is pretty frustrating, isn't it? >> i disagree with his characterization it would be the most irresponsible thing. i think messing around with not raising the debt ceiling and risking the default on the

american debt was probably the most irresponsible thing we've seen this congress do, but the thing we need to remember, this is the same congress that did that, the same congress that put the gun to the head of the american economy over raising the debt limit, which means paying bills for things we've already done. knowing this is the same group and we haven't entered the 113th congress yet, it's not surprising they are willing to do this with the fiscal cliff. it's clear also they don't care about deficits, because the two things they can't agree is rescind all the spending cuts in defense, in the sequester, which, of course, would raise the deficit if they did that, and they can't agree to any tax increases at all, even though tax increases would reduce the deficit. >> catherine, isn't it their deficit in large part deficit? >> of course, but they have political amnesia. ideology is the science of idiots. here's one of these moments where when you live inside the box and refuse to look at empirical evidence, refuse to

understand history to show us how economies work, how tax cuts or increases affect populations, then they are going to follow this line of idiocy over their own, i think, political cliff. and the partisanship is going to wreak tremendous havoc on the republican party in the upcoming elections. >> we have limited time. i want to go back to john harwood. is there a time here, john, when we're going to see the markets start to react or are we expecting most traders to wait until after the first to make big decisions? >> i think that's when they reacted. if we go over the cliff, even for a couple of days, you're going to see a reaction. i think at the end of the day you will see action if we go over the cliff for a couple of days, because i don't agree with jonathan that they are immune to public opinion. it is going to take a while for it to kick in. a lot of the members of the house want to become senators one day and republicans who are

senators now understand that they are operating on a different political terrain and just as mitch mcconnell brokered a deal finally to resolve that hammer against your head torture that republicans were suffering along with the country during the fiscal cliff deal in 2011, that same thing is going to happen if we go over the cliff. republicans don't want to sustain anymore damage to their brand. they've been under water in our nbc/wall street journal poll six straight years and pay a price for that. >> john harwood, thank you for your reporting from washington. after the break, there have been dozens of gun-related deaths since the sandy hook massacre and the nra is still doubling down on its plan to add more guns to schools. >> if it's crazy to call for putting police and armed security in our school to protect our children, then call me crazy. >> that's the wrong debate to have if you want to talk about protecting our children. >> well, this time the nra's remarks could actually be a good thing for more gun regulation.

we'll explain why next on "now." [ male announcer ] it's that time of year again. time for citi price rewind. because your daughter really wants that pink castle thing. and you really don't want to pay more than you have to. only citi price rewind automatically searches for the lowest price. and if it finds one, you get refunded the difference. just use your citi card and register your purchase online. have a super sparkly day! ok. [ male announcer ] now all you need is a magic carriage. citi price rewind. start saving at citi.com/pricerewind.

i don't have to leave my desk and get up and go to the post office anymore. [ male announcer ] with stamps.com you can print real u.s. postage for all your letters and packages. i have exactly the amount of postage i need, the instant i need it. can you print only stamps? no... first class. priority mail. certified. international. and the mail man picks it up. i don't leave the shop anymore. [ male announcer ] get a 4 week trial plus $100 in extras including postage and a digital scale.

go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again.

in upstate new york, police are investigating the murder of two firefighters on christmas eve. investigators say the alleged gunman, william spengler, was found dead armed with a bushmaster rifle, which was illegal for him to have after a conviction for killing his grandmother. while some shootings are drawing more attention after the mass murderer in newtown, these kind of killings are certainly not rare. in the first week following sandy hook elementary, there were 100 deadly shootings across the united states, as "the huffington post" reported and the total number of shooting deaths runs higher. every week 600 people die from

gun violence according to statistics from the brady campaign. will the new concern about sandy hook draw new attention to this old and enduring problem? progress is the way we talk about this debate. here's new york mayor cory booker on sunday. >> what frustrates me about this debate is it's a false debate, this is a false debate. this is a convenient tip to try to split our country more. most agree to stop the carnage going on in cities all across america. >> booker's premise is there is a consensus on gun regulations but the nra has artificially frozen that debate. other reformers say for a real breakthrough, supporters of gun regulation need a clear political enemy to organize against. nick confessore, i'm going to you, nra has money and members and we talked a lot in the past days since this shooting about their role in the political debate. is it also possible, though,

what's happened is a one-sided debate about to become a two-sided debate because the president of the united states says this is going to be a priority in his state of the union? >> certainly a priority if the president wants to advance it. he has the biggest bully pulpit in the country. the president can convince half the country or more that he's right, but to stop anything from happening, the nra does not have to convince half the country. it has to mobilize its members in key districts and it's not artificially freezing anything, it's politically freezing something by mobilizing your people who they have who are single-issue voters who care a lot about this and agree with their executives and kind of officers about how -- about what is sensible and wrong in stopping gun violence. >> one argument is that mobilization, though, to your point, is very asimilymmetric.

research in this area shows that you have right up in the shooting you have a spike of discussions of gun control. this was true after the assassination attempt of congresswoman giffords and after aurora, then in the following weeks, the discussion of the policy fades. and one of the political scientists involved in this calls it, of course, the issue attention cycle, and i want to read one of these remarks for you to think about. he talks about the media's intense interest in and subsequent boredom with a public policy problem is known as an issue-attention cycle. a dramatic issue prompts news and inevitable decline in coverage. policy issues sustain received attention only when the parties are engaged in loud public conflict. >> the nra knows this. giffords, aurora, here, they go quiet for the first 24, 48 hours, and very subtly they begin to make small

pronouncements and then they begin to work on their lobbying effort avoiding t inin ining th debate. they let our shortened attention span move somewhere else and are effective in maintaining the legislation they want. >> the other thing is they understand the vast majority of shootings are not as dramatic as what happened in sandy hook, so even though there's a steady accumulation of deaths that are happening every day and droning on, they know we in the media won't give them that same kind of attention so it will go down. my question is whether or not by the time we get to the state of the union in late january whether we will be at this height and level of attention as horrific as this issue is, other things will happen in between. >> that doubles back with nick's point, right, which is what does the nra stand for and do they stand for their agenda in front of only their most die-hard adherence or does the public learn about it? let's look just briefly on what is on the nra's basic score card

agenda. this is how they assess members, oppose closing the so-called terror gap. they oppose closing the gun show loophole. they support an amendment that makes it harder to trace guns specifically used in crimes that would be not law-abiding gun use. they would support amendments to carry guns on amtrak, national parks and bars and what i would call the notorious stand your ground legislation. do you think that agenda, if it has more exposure in this debate, i mean if the president read off those things in the state of the union, do you think that would drive a wedge between the average gun owner and the nra's national agenda? >> it would start a debate. look, it's not the job of reporters to carry one side of an argument. if the nra is making an argument and no one is making one against them, it has a consequence for the debate. what the gun control side has lacked for a long time is a

powerful grassroots group that actually has the muscle and the money to force the conversation, to force leaders and lawmakers and presidents to talk about it. so you don't have a solution or problems -- >> i think we're abdicating responsibility there. we talk about, you know, far right and left and act like we're having a balanced debate. it's rare we go through statistics and teach the substance of any daebebate and either get rid of all guns or let everybody have them as a point of liberty. >> our coverage in "the times," we've had a number of stories after the shooting examining various types of questions in a broad way that arise out of the shooting, looking at some of the policy problems, and that's going to run its course and we're going to do that, but after that point, it's not our job to be advocating for one side. >> part of what you're saying or what any objective reporter is going to say, they can't create the events, so once the event

fades, the only other event is political dispute, right? then jonathan, do you think the president will be able to do something beyond the state of the union address? the reason i go back to that, it is rare for presidents to say two months out, here's something that's going to be in my state of the union, watch out for it. he's raising the bar on himself, which is not uncommon in washington. >> the question is can he get a law passed, i say no. the same answer as the previous segment, republicans aren't going to pass anything. what he can do is make this the democratic position on guns, make it part of their agenda so when the democrats have a chance to exercise leverage of power, which is how anything gets done in washington anywhere in the current era when the democrats have the house and senate and can lock those pieces in, they'll use their power to pass a law. >> we got to run, but i'll get you back in. next up, we're going to look at the potential nomination of former senator chuck hagel. will he go the way of ambassador susan rice, who was discussed,

attacked, and, of course, never even nominated? we're going to tackle that. plus, bold sartorial choices, teleprompter troubles and a whole lot of doritos. that scratches the surface at this table on "now." we have a special romp through the highlights of 2012. you're not going to want to miss it. [ woman ] ring. ring.

progresso. in what world do potatoes, bacon and cheese add up to 100 calories? your world. ♪ [ whispers ] real bacon... creamy cheese... 100 calories... [ chef ] ma'am [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. have you heard about the latest controversial name floated for the president's cabinet? chuck hagel is getting hammered for statements about guy and jewish statements. is he too liberal on foreign policy for republicans or just too close to obama? well, we're going to tell you why the hagel fight matters, even if he becomes another causality of washington's angry nomination process. [ male announcer ] this december, remember --

what starts with adding a friend... ♪ ...could end with adding a close friend. the lexus december to remember sales event is on. this is the pursuit of perfection.

i think all 100 senators ought to be on the line on this. what do you believe? what are you willing to support? what do you think? why are you elected, because you wanted a safe job? go sell shoes. this is a tough business. but is it any tougher, us having to take a tough vote, express ourselves, and have the courage to step up than what we're asking our young men and women to do? i don't think so. >> by opposing george w. bush's iraq surge in 2007, chuck hagel endeared himself to anti-war democrats but lost a lot of republican support. now while president obama's next potential secretary of defense is being hailed by some precisely because his views do fall outside the mainstream, many others are saying that chuck hagel's views on israel and iran and his previous comments on gay rights are

completely out of touch. so while the likelihood of john kerry receiving app unanimous confirmation vote in the senator, the decision to float hagel for the pentagon is having the opposite effect. >> i think this will be a very tough confirmation process. >> a lot of republicans are asking hard questions and i don't think he's going to get many republican votes. i think it would be a challenging nomination. >> in another distress signal for the white house, the former vietnam vet and nebraska senator was unable to secure the backing of the number three democrat in the senate. >> that's his choice. i think once he makes it, his record will be studied carefully, but until that point, i think we're not going to know what's going to happen. >> can you support him? >> i'd have to study his record. i'm not going to comment until the president makes a nomination. >> wow. schumer's was the sign of this nomination's downward trajectory. after watching on tv, mike allen

wrote he received an immediate e-mail from an astute republican official saying, pass the jam, he's toast. so is it game over for hagel? the white house certainly seemed to be backtracking this weekend. a senior official told the national journal on sunday it was fair to say obama's considering candidates other than hagel for defense secretary, so will republicans get their way again? as democrats are left scratching their heads about the possibility of the president getting rolled on a second nomination, the question for them is if hagel is really toast, is obama milk toast? i'm going right to joy reid, you don't like milk toast leadership, i don't know where you stand on toast. >> it's carbohydrate-laden, so i'm against it. >> it's the holidays. >> that's true. >> people are royally upset. hagel said objectionable things, no one, not even his people, are defending that. on the other hand, as i said, he would be, by the standards of

pentagon leadership, which is its own metric, he would be a more liberal, more reformist voice for a more multilateral and constrained pentagon policy, yet he's running into all this opposition. >> exactly, and if you look at people opposing him, these are neocons because he stood up to cheney when cheney had the vader hat on. he was strong enough to stand up to his party on the iraq war. for the love of god, last time i checked, president obama is the president of the united states. we don't have to personally love each and every one of them. it's his choice. let us stop having neoconservatives in the senate choose the entire obama cabinet. >> in theory, i think you're right. in practice -- >> that means he doesn't agree with you. >> i think you make good points. the truth is the person who's going to set the policy and agenda is barack obama. he's very hands on. it's really a symbolic fight. the question is do you need a symbolic fight when you can get somebody else to do what you

want just as well without going through combat, intense combat, over some of these legislative issues, especially the budget stuff right away. it seems to me -- >> what that sounds like, i want to get joy in the panel, that sounds what you hear from washington democrats, every time they are losing is a symbolic fight. you know who doesn't think it's a symbolic fight, the republicans don't seem to think this is a symbolic fight. the republicans don't think this is a waste of, quote, political capital, joy, the republicans seem to think it is worth going hard at the war cabinet of this war president. >> the republicans aren't good at distinguishing between necessary and unnecessary fights. >> they won a fight over susan rice. they have gone from advise and consent to don't even think about it. before anyone is nominated, don't even bring that person over here. if barack obama backs down two senate republicans on this, it's going to set a stage for the beginning of his second term that the senate republicans, who

they lost this election, are controlling who is in his cabinet. >> what is so hysterical is john kerry, go back to 2004, let's talk about the political arguments from the right about this man's military experience, about who he was, go back to his vietnam days, the swift vote, now he's god's gift. well, he's creating a vacuum with a very senior senate position. he's creating a race in massachusetts, so now they love this man, and yet chuck hagel, independent, thoughtful, conservative, two purple hearts, is not good enough because politically it's not as -- as effective. >> not to beat up on jonathan chait, because i wouldn't do that -- >> go ahead, i'm right here. >> there's a veritable brady bunch of nominees and almost-nominees. we're going to put up the brady bunch on the screen, elizabeth warren, highly qualified, tom

daschle, susan rice we just discussed, peter diamond, a nobel economist who couldn't get a vote. let's be clear, we're not talking about people voting down nominees. that is in the constitution and their right. what we're talking about is the context of preventing votes on these people and thus hamstringing the newly reelected president, nick. >> once again, it's asymmetrical, it cost the senate republicans nothing to do this. it costs obama something to fight it, to push through, to have the fight, and it's worth it to them, not only on a symbolic level, but a substantiative level of defining who is acceptable for one of these cabinet posts. >> wouldn't it have been better, nick, for president obama on susan rice to let the republicans have the spectacle of pushing around this african-american woman and ordering her to explain she didn't stop an attack on benghazi? >> they obviously decided it

wasn't. i'm not sure why. >> on the politics, your former colleague wrote about this, if white house operatives really believe because hagel is a republican former senator and the gop already got its scalp, hawks would look the other way while the administration nominated a man likely to oppose against iran? those white house operatives should seek a different line of work. joy reid? >> the neocons won't stop. they've been wrong on every foreign policy question of my lifetime and still want to be in charge. >> to think of another liberal-type reformer you have to go to harold brown under carter and was a multilateralist, looked to use the pentagon as a place to negotiate arms reduction treaties. it was a different type of defense strategy, it was, by the way, controversial at the time. but the point to hagel, joy, is we're talking about someone who

objectionable comments aside or not, someone who would be a change agent, and why won't the president fight for that? >> his only objectionable comment was his comment on the gay community. >> how long ago? >> bill clinton signed, you know -- >> clinton, who progressives like. >> it was a very different time in gay rights. >> and the issue on israel, what did he say, he's not a senator from israel? have we gotten to the point you can't say that? he's a republican, we're not going to agree with everything he says. >> he was against sanctions in iran. there's a real difference in iran policy, but look again, it's a symbolic fight between neoconservatives and people who hate neoconservatives and they are itching to fight each other and he's become the fight. obama made the decision, obama's going to make the decision. people are getting too worked up about the person who really

isn't going to make the decision. >> jonathan gets the last word on this. we're moving from iranian sapgss and the carter administration to something a bit more fun, believe it or not. coming up, angry teddy bear, steady eddie, those are all coined nicknames in 2012 for the presidential candidates. we'll look back at the rest of the best on "now." mine was earned off vietnam in 1968. over the south pacific in 1943. i got mine in iraq, 2003. usaa auto insurance is often handed down from generation to generation. because it offers a superior level of protection, and because usaa's commitment to serve the military, veterans and their families is without equal. begin your legacy, get an auto insurance quote. usaa. we know what it means to serve.

[ buzzing ] bye dad. drive safe. k. love you. [ chirping, buzzing continues ] [ horn honks ] [ buzzing continues ] [ male announcer ] the sprint drive first app. blocks and replies to texts while you drive. we can live without the &. visit sprint.com/drive. and next up after the break, it was a good year for "now" with alex wagner and there to help it along were the clown car, bull pen, and panel. i want you to stick around. we're going to look back at some of "now's" greatest moments of 2012 up next.

angry attack muffins technicaling holiday sweaters, and, of course, how to get your wag on. while alex continues her vacation on pluto, we want to give you a look back right now at a year on "now." >> can mitt romney self deport himself into the oval office? >> carl rove thinks he's conspireing with the easter bunny. >> is the republican party fired up and ready to go? >> wednesday, june 14th. wednesday, december 7th. >> and this is "now." >> this year the grand old party gifted us the grand old clown car. time to bring in steady eddie, aka rick santorum. seems to be in the throws of a tantorum. i say hot garbage. mitt romney, the kaiser of the republican party.

message to newt gingrich, no hold's bar. that was my addendum. the angry teddy bear, newt gingrich. the angry teddy bear, the angry attack muffin. i noticed you liked to call him that as well. >> i stole that from you. >> you are the creator of the angry teddy bear comparison with newt gingrich. >> for that, i expect to be charging more higher rates in the coming months. >> as the primaries produce new names, so did our show. >> the effortlessly elegant jonathan capehart. eternally buzzy ben smith. ari melber. steve. queen bee and managing editor of the sunday morning himself. favorite import from the uk, maggie haberman. michael steele, notorious as we call you here. thank you for your time. indubable. chris solizza.

>> i assume they are compliments. >> they are $5 compliments. >> emmy darling. emmy darling. the man with the golden throat. cnbc guru john harwood. our favorite wonk of them all. president obama's money bunny bill burton. >> money bunny? >> given the hop to it attitude. current editor of "now." >> we want to make you the official cultural ambassador of the program now. >> okay! >> we can always count on a little help from our friends. >> always handsome martin bashir. >> you've put me between two of the most attractive people on this network, jonathan capehart. >> i got a title, did you know that? >> this is a legendary moment. >> this is hot. >> this is hot. >> in the days before my time, less known your time --

>> we're just babies around you. >> that's why i come on, to get my wag on. i get my wag on. >> stop right now. >> now! >> thank you for getting me wag on. >> anybody watching this show, by the way, doesn't have direct plans to vote is an idiot. go vote, vote. don't watch this until you've voted. >> the man that gets the last word every night on msnbc and here too, i bet. >> it's in my deal, last word. >> when lawrence o'donnell is here we go metta. >> nobody talks about catholic men being able to get viagra. >> exactly. >> hello? >> what is viagra? >> this conversation needs to be dialled way back. >> stage of capitol hill, celebrity doppelganger. >> here now chris hayes. >> just spit on you. nbd. >> it wasn't always easy. >> before we go, we will leave our readers with -- readers?

watchers. >> pancake crisis or political fearmongering? i can't read the teleprompter today. we'll discuss the lead up to november 6th. in the lead up to november 6th, period. there is more chance you will get hit by lightning, i think, on a plane -- actually, that would be increasing your chances. but he does have his own stash of several millions of gallons of oil. i'm kidding, private stash. president's private stash of oil, don't listen to me. >> peg gi newman today in the gop? wall street journal. >> i ate a hot cup of coffee. so hot. i can't even tell you. >> hammering nails into a board. to repeat, this is an actual event in the romney olympics. >> get set, go! ♪ >> you go, boss. you get a platinum hammer. >> congratulations. big win. >> pop quiz, hot shots.

the winning team will get a washer and dryer set and possibly a car ride home. all right! buzz feed sent us 100 boxes of peeps. we don't know where the beef is, but we know where the marshmallow peeps are. >> she's congratulating ben with 100 bags of doritos. >> thank you so much. nothing could be more appropriate. >> we've got an attitude. >> there's a metaphor between my frequently worn yankee cap and your infrequently worn nats hat. >> you could say the president gave john boehner a political mulligan. how is that for golf talk, america? >> there we go. >> who says i haven't been on the links? i wish i had my eye black, but i do have -- i should have put this on before the break. i can't do it. it goes on my wrist. >> the dress code was open for interpretation. >> ari melber charting new sartorial territory. that is a fetching color for you, chairman. >> thank you, thank you, ho, ho

hey! >> kurt andersen, would you buy a too legit to mitt shirt? >> i have several. >> only capitol hill correspondent who may or may not be wearing boat shoes at this moment. >> how are you, my friend? >> luke russert joins the panel next on "now." look at those boat shoes. >> i'm just a brother looking for a cigar, book, and a fireplace. >> if you start running your hands through the mashed potatoes at the dinner table, everyone else does. >> the man who does not believe in unicorns, what do you think of the attitude regarding minorities in this country? >> nothing. >> terrific point. >> thank you, governor. >> occasionally you do. >> 8.3% unemployment, bragging ability -- >> governor pataki, you're on your talking points. this governor or this governor? >> former lieutenant governor, i'm sitting here -- >> expression in my profession

called plop sweat. >> i would like to have a pro form of the session of the show and come in every three days and write something down. >> i'm about to get into my coin collecting story. when i used to collect coins -- >> this is ratings gold. >> this is called in budget circles and more boring -- >> budget circles. >> can you feel your ratings going up, alex? can you feel the people tuning in? >> two other factors before nicole rips your head off. >> we have to go to break. >> awesome. that means i don't get killed by nicole. >> coming up, nicole will tear off john's head. >> ouch! >> call me doolittle. >> do we have that photo of the governor's dog maggie? >> oh, that's a dog. >> the composition of this panel proves there's actually more men, okay. >> you look swell all the time. >> you're invited back next week. >> i knew i'd get back on the show somehow.

>> the first thing is the last and you, good woman, have it. >> there were no ench la das, i know. >> this show is a metaphor call enchilada. this is how the show goes sometimes. ♪ now if you have a favorite "now" you didn't get to, send it into us on twitter. i want to go around the table, though, first. catherine, did we miss anything there? >> no, and you did have one of my favorites, because i was here, that was the peeps, the easter peeps, the rendition was quite extraordinary. i thought where else might i have seen that but here? >> details. >> i'm reflecting on the fact not having to show your legs or shoes is a great feature of the layout on the show. >> i want to know what was up with that sweater. what about that about? >> i asked to wear a sweater and received a very discouraging

reply. now we know why. you ruined it for the rest of us. >> there was a back story, which is my girlfriend got me the holiday sweater, i was excited to wear it, i was told it's fine, then when i got here, they were like what are you wearing, which made me realize maybe it's fine was we're all joking around, you wouldn't really do that. >> but you did. >> you have your constitution dress, people have to look out for that. >> all i have to say is ho, ho hey. >> are you quoting michael steele? >> i'm quoting michael steele. >> we want everyone to tweet in on twitter or facebook. search for "now" on facebook.com. i want to say a big thank you to this special edition of "now," jonathan, joy, nicolas, and, of course catherine. that's it for "now." i'll be back tomorrow joined by steve gornacki, politico's ben white and senator jeff merkley who will detail his plan to fight filibuster.

next is "andrea mitchell reports." luke russert is in for andrea. how are you doing? >> i'm doing good. nice to see a writer for "the nation" dress like that. >> i cleaned it up. >> great stuff, good to see you in the hosting chair. i'm luke russert in for andrea mitchell. up next, deadline looms and house is staying out on the winter break. the movements and lack thereof in washington with senator kay bailey hutchison and congressman jerry nadler. plus what's next on gun control and all you can look forward to in the next 24. iti price rewind. because your daughter really wants that pink castle thing. and you really don't want to pay more than you have to. only citi price rewind automatically searches for the lowest price. and if it finds one, you get refunded the difference. just use your citi card and register your purchase online. have a super sparkly day! ok. [ male announcer ] now all you need is a magic carriage. citi price rewind. start saving at citi.com/pricerewind.

i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i looked at my options. then i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, it helps pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you thousands in out-of-pocket costs. to me, relationships matter. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks,

and you never need a referral to see a specialist. so don't wait. call now and request this free decision guide to help you better understand medicare... and which aarp medicare supplement plan might be best for you. there's a wide range to choose from. we love to travel -- and there's so much more to see. so we found a plan that can travel with us. anywhere in the country. [ male announcer ] join the millions of people who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. remember, all medicare supplement insurance plans help cover what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you thousands a year in out-of-pocket costs. call now to request your free decision guide. and learn more about the kinds of plans that will be here for you now -- and down the road. i have a lifetime of experience.

so i know how important that is. o0 with a new project in mind, some how-to knowledge to give us an new years clutter is no match for someone with big ideas. edge, and more savings down every aisle. it only takes a few twists and turns for those bright ideas to make the new year even brighter. more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. start fresh and save with hdx 20 gallon totes, a special buy at just $5.88 a piece. right now on "andrea mitchell reports," six days till the new year, and there's no bipartisan deal to avert the fiscal cliff in sight. the president is cutting his vacation short, but the house is still in recess with no immediate plans to return. the ball is now in senate democrat's court and